
Class 

Book 



f 


% 






( 







2/ou sAa// not press etomn upon the brow of tabor th/s crown of 


thorns/ pou shatt not cruc/fp manhinct upon a cross of ^oicl. ” 


BRYAN at GHIGAGO. 









I 




•s 





1 













I 

( 

. •* . 



I 


i 







THE 


“CROSS OF GOLD. 


THE 

GREAT CONVENTION 

OF THE 

Democrats of America, 

HELD AT 

CHICAGO, July 7, 1896. 


PLATFORM 

AND 

BRYAN’S SPEECH: 


SOME TRUTHS TOLD BY A MAN OF 
THE PLAIN PEOPLE. 



BENJ. RUSH DAVENPORT, 

AUTHOR OF 

“Uncle Sam’s Cabins,” “Crime of Caste,” “Blue and Gray,” 
“Best Fifty Books,” “History of the United States,” etc. 


Published by THE KRATZ PUB. CO., Buffalo. N. Y. 









1 




\ 816 


c— 


Copyright by 


HENRY HOMER, 
Buffalo, N. Y. 
1896. 


A-~( 

I 


f\ 

"r» •> 





I 


■;b 








« ' • • V ___ 



mTi. • r 



*;, 


Lf’^t 



^ .•\ * 


• */ 


m:^’- 



A 


1 • 


r 


■• « a t 


►'»A 


• 0 



9 ; 



• A •--. ^ ■ ' -; 

• -4 ’ *# 


V- 


.« 







V 


t.' 


■■■ . 
' 4>' <' * * V .. 

•V :*<;/,■ 




/ ^ 


A *. 


f Vp^ 






-■; * •■ci<w 

•Jwt^ 


► ♦* V 


. t 




•• t 


*, / 


• >S s- 

Mii.- - , : 




ft" 



* ► 



*? 




t • 




t:' 


•j*'. 



a. . ^r-jl-VA* 

. 'rji'*^*^** ^ r*. 

k i • *• • > J \ 

-k , * K i . * ‘ “A 

SS:' 


1 ' 

V': 

^ * ' 

' ^■• ' 

•» • 

. Y/ ir . . 

• A 'V'^ 

4 

• 

1 .*. . < 

N V* *. »* _ 

/ 


N r- 


I - 


k .% 


w 








> •^; 7 * 




,'Otv 


' ,■■/ .• tifwwk' 


4 4 




' • j“ a 





.*1 



Wh\ I 

^ * V wX .L* ; ^ 


^ « 




. ‘♦Vj I 'fcl 

’ ■ " li 



tV' ■ 






WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN, 

NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT ON THE DEMOCRATIC TICKET. 



















WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN. 


William Jennings Bryan, nominated for president on the Demo¬ 
cratic ticket, and whose nomination is ratifying daily in the hearts 
of the plain people all over the land, and whose picture adorns the 
first page of this pamphlet, comes of an old American family 
whose ancestors have been Americans long Arefore the Revolution. 
Mr. Bryan is of Irish extraction. William Jennings Bryan was born 
March 19, i860, on a farm near Salem, Ill. He was graduated in 
1881 from the Illinois College ; he studied law in Chicago. In 1887 
opened an office in Lincoln, Neb.' the next year he was a delegate 
to the Democratic State Convention. At 30 years of age he was 
elected representative to Congress, by a tremendous majority, in a 
Republican district. A magnificent oration on Tariff Reform and 
another against the repeal of the Sherman Silver Coinage Act 
elevated the young Western Democrat to an exalted position in the 
House of Representatives. Mr. Bryan is a man of fine presence ; he 
reminds one of the great Pennsylvania Commoner, Samuel J. 
Randall. He is about five feet ten inches in height and weighs about 
180 pounds, and has dark hair and dark eyes. Mr. Bryan is a Pres¬ 
byterian, but steadfastly opposes the bringing of religion into poli¬ 
tics or politics into religion. Mr. Bryan is a teetotaler. The next 
President of the United States, the idol of the Plain People, is the 
outspoken, unflinching enemy of Class Legislation. He is a believer 
in local self-government, and emphatically opposed to Federal Elec- 
. tion laws. He believes in the Free Coinage of Silver at 16 to i, 
and in tariff for revenue only, and denies the right of the govern¬ 
ment to take from any man by means of taxation any money not 
needed for government expenses or to tax one man to enrich 
another. William Jennings Bryan possesses every attribute and 
every quality of heart and mind to make him the long-looked-for 
and wished-for leader of the Democratic masses of America. His 
elevation to the highest position in the civilized world is but a 
question of a few months. 


ARTHUR SEWALL. 


Arthur Sewall, the Democratic nominee for Vice-President, whose 
picture occupies the second page in this pamphlet, was born in Bath, 
Me., November 25, 1835. Like Mr. Bryan, who occupies the first 
place on the Democratic ticket, Mr. Sewall’s family is of old pre- 
Revolutionary New England stock — American for more than two 
centuries. Mr. Sewall succeeded his father and grandfather as an 
American ship-builder. The Sewall family have contributed as 
largely as any American family in sending the Star Spangled Ban¬ 
ner to every quarter of the globe, and whitening the seas with 
American sails. Mr. Sewall has the distinction of being one of the 
pioneers of the Free Silver Coinage movement in New England — 
his Democracy, like his native State, is rock-ribbed. As President 
of the august Senate of the United States Mr. Sewall will fully do 
justice to a position which loyal Americans regard with unusual 
respect. 


A 


























- 


■'OTV.'T^'• ,\v‘’?- ^ 

•' '• W -rSIPI). '■''•. "■«<« I* ■'-' 

"> •- . K. ' ' 

I ’i, 's>. 


1 , ■' ‘ 




w- 

^ ^ • j ■ € ^ 

,v 


mm 

•► » -A; ♦ 


' < j 


> , 


» 



1*4 •'’ ■ ‘ ■* ' \ 


^''■’ '■ 'ff«‘'' ■ '• 

fiV* - V’WdHBr !**■ 


*■ •k 


‘u 


/••I 




r ' K i 


ra^-'TT® ’ 'iWr 

-■£ • .'ir’. 


5 >' 


-‘fe .' ;•.t,-'is ■ 




• " ' <, 

' • "js ■ '• ^•.4 ^ ' 

* ■ I I ■ * > P#V 





'THE KULIv 'TEXT OK TME SPEECH 

DELIVERED BY 

WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 

OFi' NEBRASKA, 

Before the Democratic Convention at Chicago, July lo, 1896. 


This Speech Won the Votes of Two Thirds of the Delegates in 
the Convention, and Gained the Speaker the N'omina= 
tion for President on the Democratic Ticket. 


These Words will Burn into the Brains and Win the Hearts 
of Two Thirds of the Plain People of America, and 
Place William Jennings Bryan in the Presi¬ 
dential Chair on March 4th, 1897. 


Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Convention : 

I would be presumptuous, indeed, to present myself against the 
distinguished gentlemen to whom you have listened if this were 
but a measuring of ability,-but this is not a contest among per- s 
sons. The humblest citizen! in all the land when clad in the armor 
of a righteous cause is stronger than the whole hosts error can 
bring. 

I come to speak to you in defence of a cause holy as the cause 
of liberty — the cause of humanity. 

When this debate is concluded a motion will be made to lay 
upon the table the resolution offered in commendation of the 
administration, and also the resolution in condemnation of the 
administration. I shall object to bringing the question down to a 
level of persons. The individual is but an atom ; he is born, he 
acts, he dies, but principles are eternal and this has been a contest 
of principles. Never before in the history of this country has there 
been witnessed such a contest as that through which we have 
passed. Never before in the history of American politics has a 
great issue been fought out, as this issue has been, by the voters 
themselves. 





G 


/ 


BEGINNING OF THE CRUSADE. 

On March 4, 1895, a few Democrats, most of them members of 
Congress, issued an address to the Democrats of the nation, assert¬ 
ing that the money question was the paramount issue of the hour ; 
asserting also the right of a majority of the Democratic party to 
control the position of the party on this paramount issue, and con¬ 
cluding with the request that all believers in free coinage of silver 
in the Democratic party should organize and take charge of and 
control the policy of the Democratic party. 

Three months later, at Memphis, an organization was perfected, 
and the silver Democrats went forth openly and boldly and cour¬ 
ageously proclaimed their belief,'and declaring that if successful 
they would crystallize in a platform the declaration which they 
had made. And then began the conflict, with a zeal approaching 
the zeal which inspired the crusaders who followed Peter the 
Hermit. 

Our silver Democrats went forth from victory unto victory until 
they are assembled now, not to discuss, not to debate, but to enter 
up the judgment rendered by the plain people of this country. 

In this contest brother has been arrayed against brother and 
father against son. The warmest ties of love and acquaintance and 
association have been disregarded. Old leaders have been cast 
aside when they refused to give expression to the sentiments of 
those whom they would lead, and new leaders have sprung up to 
give direction to this cause of truth. 

Thus has the contest been waged, and we have assembled here 
under as binding and solemn instructions as were ever fastened 
upon the representatives of a people. We do not come as indi¬ 
viduals. Why, as individuals we might have been glad to compli¬ 
ment the gentleman from New York, Senator Hill, but we know 
that the people for whom we speak would never be willing to put 
him in a position where he could thwart the will of the Democratic 
party. 

NOT A QUESTION OF PERSONS. 

I said it was not a question of persons ; it was a question of 
principle, and it is not with gladness, my friends, that we find our¬ 
selves brought into conflict with those who are now arrayed on the 
other side. 

The gentleman who just preceded me. Gov. Russell, spoke of 
the old State of Massachusetts. Let me assure him that not one 
person in all this convention entertains the least hostility to the 


people of the State of Massachusetts. But we stand here repre¬ 
senting people who are the equals before the law of the greatest 
citizens in the State of Massachusetts. 

When you come before us and tell us that we shall disturb your 
business interests, we reply that you have disturbed our business 
interests by your course. We say to you that you have made too 
limited in its application the definition of “ Business man.” The 
man who is employed for wages is as much a business man as his 
employer. The attorney in a country town is as much a business 
man as the corporation counsel in a great metropolis. The 
merchant at the cross roads store is as much a business man as the 
merchant of New York. 

The farmer who goes forth in the morning and toils all day, be¬ 
gins in the spring and toils all summer, and, by the application of 
brains and muscle to the natural resources of this country, creates 
wealth is as much a business man as the man who goes upon, the 
Board of Trade and bets upon the price of grain. .:^The miners who 
go two thousand fe.et into the earth or climb two thousand feet upon 
the cliffs and bring forth from their hiding places the precious 
metals to be poured into the channels of trade are as much business 
men as the few financial magnates who, in a back room, corner the 
money market of the world. J 

We come to speak for that broader class of business men. Ah, 
my friends, we say not one word against those who live upon the 
Atlantic coast ; but those hardy pioneers who braved all the dan¬ 
gers of the wilderness, who have made the desert to blossom as the 
rose — those pioneers away out there, rearing their children near to 
Nature’s heart, where they can mingle their voices with the voices 
of the birds — out there where they have erected schoolhouses for 
the education of their young, and churches where they praise their 
Creator, and cemeteries where sleep the ashes of their dead, are as 
deserving of the consideration of this party as any people in this 
country. 

NOT A MAN OF CONQUEST. 

It is for these that we speak. We do not come as aggressors. 
Our war is not a war of conquest. We are fighting in the defense 
of our homes, our families and posterity. We have petitioned, and ' 
our petitions have been scorned. We have entreated, and our en¬ 
treaties have been disregarded. We have begged, and they have 
been mocked, and our calamity came. 

We beg no longer ; we entreat no more ; we petition no more. 
We defy them. ' 


8 


The gentleman from Wisconsin has said that he fears a Robes¬ 
pierre. My friend, in this land of the free you need fear no tyrant 
who will spring up from among the people. What we need is an 
Andrew Jackson, to stand, as Jackson stood, against the encroach¬ 
ments of aggrandized wealth. 

They tell us that this platform was made to catch votes. We 
reply to them that changing conditions make new issues ; that 
the principles upon which rest Democracy are as everlasting as the 
hills, but that they must be applied to new conditions as they arise. 
Conditions have arisen, and we are attempting to meet these 
conditions. 

They tell us that the income tax ought not to be brought in 
here ; that it is a new idea. They criticise us for our criticisms of 
the Supreme Court of the United States. My friends, we have not 
criticised. We have simply called attention to what you know. If 
you want criticisms read the dissenting opinion of the court. That 
will give you criticisms. 

They say we passed an unconstitutional law. I deny it. The 
income tax was not unconstitutional when, it was passed. It was 
not unconstitutional when it went before the Supreme Court for the 
first time. It did not become unconstitutional until one Judge 
changed his mind, and we cannot be expected to know when a 
Judge will change his mind. 

The income tax is a just law. It simply intends to put the 
burdens of government justly upon the backs of the people. I am 
in favor of an income tax. When I find a man who is not willing 
to pay his share of the burden of the government which protects 
him I find a man who is unworthy to enjoy the blessings of a gov¬ 
ernment like ours. 

He says that we are opposing the national bank currency. It 
is true. If you will read what Thomas Benton said . you will 
find that he said that in searching history he could find but one 
parallel to Andrew Jackson. That was Cicero, who destroyed the 
conspiracy of Catiline to save Rome. He did for Rome what 
Jackson did when he destroyed the bank conspiracy and saved 
America. 

We say in our platform that we believe the right to coin money 
and issue money is a function of government. We believe it. We 
believe it is a part of sovereignty and can no more with safety be 
delegated to private individuals than we could afford to delegate to 
private individuals the power to make penal statutes or levy law's 
for taxation. 


9 


Mr, Jefferson, who was once regarded as good Democratic 
authority, seems to have a different opinion from the gentleman 
who has addressed us on the part of the minority. 

Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue 
of paper money is a function of the bank, and that the govern¬ 
ment ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jeffer¬ 
son rather than with them in holding, as he did, that the issue of 
money is a function of the government, and that the banks ought 
to go out of the government business. 

TENURE OF OFFICE. 

They complain about that plank which declares against the life 
tenure in office. They have tried to strain it to mean that which it 
does not mean. What we oppose in that plank is the life tenure 
that is being built at Washington, which includes from participation 
in the benefits the humbler members of our society. I cannot 
dwell on this longer in my limited time. 

Let me call attention to two or three great things. The gentle¬ 
man from New York says that he will propose an amendment pro¬ 
viding that this change in our law shall not affect contracts already 
made. Let me remind him that there is no intention of affecting 
these contracts which, according to the present laws, are made pay¬ 
able in gold. But if he means to say that we cannot change our 
monetary system without protecting those who have loaned money 
before the change was made, I want to ask him where, in law or in 
morals, he can find authority for not protecting the debtors when 
the act of 1872 was passed, when he now insists that we must pro¬ 
tect the creditor. ^ 

He says he also wants to amend this law and provide that if we 
fail to maintain a parity within a year we will then suspend the 
coinage of silver. We reply that when we advocate a thing which 
we believe will be successful, we are not compelled to raise a doubt 
as to our own sincerity by trying to show what we will do if we can. 

QUESTION OF PARITY. 

I ask him, if he will apply his logic to us, why he does not apply 
it to himself. He says that he wants this country to try to secure 
an international agreement. Why doesn’t he tell us what he is go¬ 
ing to do if they fail to secure an international agreement ! There 
is more reason for him to do that than for us to fail to maintain the 
parity. They have tried for 30 years — for 30 years — to secure an 





10 


international agreement, and those who are waiting for it most pa¬ 
tiently don’t want it at all. 

Now, my friends, let me come to the great paramount issue. If 
they ask us here why it is that we say more on the money question 
than we say upon the tariff question, I reply that if protection has 
slain its thousands, the gold standard has slain its tens of thousands. 
If they ask us why we did not embody all these things in our plat¬ 
form which we believe, we reply to them that when we have re¬ 
stored the money of the constitution, all other necessary reforms 
will be possible, and that until that is done there is no reform that 
can be accomplished. 


CHANGED IN THREE MONTHS. 

Why is it that within three months such a change has come over 
the sentiments of this country? Three months ago, when it was 
confidently asserted that those who believe in the gold standard 
would frame our platform and nominate another candidate, even 
the advocates of the gold standard did not think that we could 
elect a President, but they had good reason for the suspicion, 
because there is scarcely a State here to-day asking the gold 
standard that is not within the absolute control of the Republican 
party. 

But note the change. Mr. McKinley was nominated at St. Louis 
on a platform that declared for the maintenance of the gold stand¬ 
ard until it should be changed into bimetallism by an international 
agreement. Mr. McKinley was the most popular man among the 
Republicans, and everybody three months ago in the Republican 
party prophesied his election. 

How is it to-day ? Why, that man who used to boast that he 
looked like Napoleon — that man shudders to-day when he thinks 
that he was nominated on the anniversary of the battle of Water¬ 
loo. Not only that, but as he listens he can hear with ever increas¬ 
ing distinctness the sound of the waves as they beat upon the 
lonely shores of St. Helena. 

.Why this change ? Ah, my friends, is not the change evident 
to any one who will look at the matter ? It is no private character, 
however pure, no personal popularity, however great, that can pro¬ 
tect from the avenging wrath of an indignant people the man 
who would either declare that he is in favor of fastening the gold 
standard upon the people, or who is willing to surrender the right 
of self-government and place legislative control in the hands of 
foreign potentates and Powers. ' 


11 

CONFIDENT OF SUCCESS. 

We go forth confident that we shall win. Why ? Because upon 
the paramount issue in this campaign there is not a spot of ground 
upon which the enemy will dare to challenge battle. Why, if they 
tell us that the gold standard is a good thing, we point to their 
platform and tell them that their platform pledges the party to get 
rid of a gold standard and substitute bimetallism. If the gold 
standard is a good thing, why try to get rid of it ? 

I might call your attention to the fact that some of the very 
people who are in this convention to-day, and who tell you that we 
ought to declare in favor of international bimetallism, and thereby 
declare that the gold standard is wrong and the principle of bimet¬ 
allism is better — these very people four months ago were open 
and avowed advocates of the gold standard, and telling us 
that we could not legislate two metals together, even with all the 
world. 

I want to suggest this truth, that if the gold standard is a good 
thing we ought to declare in favor of its retention, and not in favor 
of abandoning it, and if the gold standard is a bad thing, why 
should we wait until some other nations are willing to help us to 
let go ? 

THE LINE OF BATTLE. 

Here is the line of battle —We care not upon which issue they 
force the fight. We are prepared to meet them on either issue, or 
on both. If they tell us that the gold standard is the standard of 
civilization, we reply to them that this, the most enlightened of all 
the nations of the earth, has never declared for a gold standard, 
and both the parties this year are declaring against it. 

If the gold standard is the standard of civilization, why, my 
friends, should we not have it ? So, if they come to meet us on 
that, we can present the history of our nation. More than that, we 
can tell them this, that they will search the pages of history in vain 
to find a single instance in which the common people of any land 
have ever declared themselves in favor of a gold standard. They 
can find where the holders of fixed in\>estments have. 

Mr. Carlisle said in 1878 that this was a struggle between the 
idle holders of idle capital and the struggling masses who produce 
the: wealth and pay the taxes of the country, and, my friends, it is 
simply a question that we shall decide, upon which side shall the 
Democratic party fight ? Upon the side of the idle holders of idle 
capital, or upon the side of the struggling masses ? That is the 


7 ’ 1 






12 


question that the party must answer first, and then it must be 
answered by each individual hereafter. 

The sympathies of the Democratic party, as described by the 
platform, are on the side of the struggling masses who have ever 
been the foundation of the Democratic party. There are two ideas 
of government. There are those who believe that if you just 
legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will 
leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that 
if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will 
find its way up through every class, and rest upon it. 

CITIES REST ON PRAIRIES. 

You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of 
the gold standard. I tell you that the great cities rest upon these 
broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our 
farms, and your cities will spring.up again as if by magic ; but de¬ 
stroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city 
in this country. 

My friends, we shall declare that this nation is able to legislate 
for its own people on every question, without waiting for the aid or 
consent of any other nation on earth, and upon that issue we ex¬ 
pect to carry every single State in the Union. I shall not slander 
the fair State of Massachusetts, nor New York, by saying that 
when its citizens are confronted with the proposition, is this nation 
able to attend to its own business?—I will not slander either one 
by saying that the people of those States will declare our helpless 
impotency as a nation to attend to our own business. 

ISSUE OF 1776 OVER AGAIN. 

It is the issue of 1776 over again. Our ancestors were the 
3,ooo,oo<^who had the courage to declare their political independ¬ 
ence th^n of every other nation upon earth. Shall we, their de¬ 
scendants, when we have grown to 70,000,000 declare that we are 
less independent than our forefathers ? No, my'friends, it will never 
be the judgment of this people. 

Therefore, we care not upon what lines the battle is fought. If 
they say bimetallism is good, but we cannot have it until some 
nation helps us, we reply that, instead of having a gold standard 
bimetallism and then let England have bimetallism because the 
United States has. 



13 


If they dare to come out, and in the open defend the gold 
standard as a good thing, we shall fight them to the uttermost. 
Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the 
world ; having behind us the commercial interests, and the labor¬ 
ing interests, and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their de¬ 
mands for a gold standard by saying to them, “YOU SHALL 
NOT PRESS DOWN UPON THE BROW OF LABOR THIS 
CROWN OF THORNS. YOU SHALL NOT CRUCIFY 
MANKIND UPON A CROSS OF GOLD.” 




14 


DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM. 

The following is a correct version of the platform adopted by 
the Democratic National Convention at Chicago : 


READ THIS MUCH MISREPRESENTED STATEMENT 
OF PRINCIPLES CAREFULLY! TAKE NO 
MAN’S OPINION ! ! FOLLOW NO NEWS¬ 
PAPER’S CONSTRUCTION ! ! ! 


HONESTLY ASK YOURSELF WHAT IS THERE CONTAINED IN THIS 
DECLARATION, LACKING IN PATRIOTISM, UN-AMERICAN 
OR UNWORTHY OF OUR RACE AND NATION. ANSWER 
THE QUESTION FAIRLY. THAT IS ALL THE DEMOCRATIC 
MASSES ASK : 

We, the Democrats of the United States, in National Convention assembled, do 
re-affirm our allegiance to those great essential principles of justice and liberty upon 
■which our institutions are founded, and which the Democratic party has advocated 
from Jefferson’s time to our own—freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom 
of conscience, the preservation of personal rights, the equality of all citizens before 
the law, and the faithful observance of Constitutional limitations. 

During all these years the Democratic party has resisted the tendency of selfish 
interests to the centralization of governmental power, and steadfastly maintained 
the integrity of the dual system of government established by the founders of this 
Republic of Republics. Under its guidance and teachings the great principle of 
local self-government has found its best expression in the maintenance of the rights 
of the States and in its assertion of the necessity of confining the general govern¬ 
ment to the exercise of the powers granted by the Constitution of the United 
States. 

Recognizing that the money question is paramount to all others at this time, 
we invite attention to the fact that the Federal Constitution names silver and gold 
together as the money metals of the United States, and that the first coinage law 
passed by Congress under the Constitution made the silver dollar the unit of value 
and admitted gold to free coinage at a ratio measured by the silver-dollar unit. 

We declare that the act of 1873, demonetizing silver without the knowledge or 
approval of the American people, has resulted in the appreciation of gold and a 
corresponding fall in the prices of commodities produced by the people ; a heavy 
increase in the burden of taxation and of all debts, public and private ; the enrich¬ 
ment of the money-lending class at home and abroad ; prostration of industry and 
impoverishment of the people. 

We are unalterably opposed to monometallism, which has locked fast the 
prosperity of an industrious people in the paralysis of hard times. Gold mono¬ 
metallism is a British policy, and its adoption has brought other nations into 




15 


financial servitude to London. It is not only un-American, but anti-American, and 
it can be fastened on the United States only by the stifling of that indomitable 
spirit and love of liberty which proclaimed our political independence in 1776 and 
won it in the War of the Revolution. 

\\ e demand the free and unlimited coinage of both gold and silver at the 
present legal ratio of 16 to i, without waiting for the consent or aid of any other 
nation. We demand that the standard silver dollar shall be a full legal tender 
equally with gold, for all debts, public or private, and we favor such legislation as 
will prevent for the future demonetization of any kind of legal-tender money by 
private contract. 

We are opposed to the policy and practice of surrendering to the holders of the 
obligations of the United States the option reserved by law to the Government of 
redeeming such obligations in either silver coin or gold coin. 

We are opposed to the issuing of interest-bearing bonds of the United States in 
time of peace, and condemn the trafficking with banking syndicates which, in 
exchange for bonds and at an enormous profit to themselves, supply the Federal 
Treasury with gold to maintain the policy of gold monometallism. 

Congress alone has the power to coin and issue money, and President Jackson 
declared that this power could not be delegated to corporations or individuals. We 
therefore demand that the power to issue notes to circulate as money be taken from 
the national banks and that all paper money shall be issued directly by the Treasury 
Department, be redeemable in coin and receivable for all debts, public and private. 

We hold that tariff duties should be levied for revenue, such duties to be so 
adjusted as to operate equally throughout the country and not discriminate between 
class or section, and that taxation should be limited by the needs of the Govern¬ 
ment honestly and economically administered. We denounce as disturbing to busi¬ 
ness the Republican threat to restore the McKinley law, which has been twice con¬ 
demned by the people in national elections, and which, enacted under the false plea 
of protection to home industry, proved a prolific breeder of trusts and monopolies, 
enriched the few at the expense of the many, restricted trade and deprived the pro¬ 
ducers of the great American staples of access to their natural markets. 

Until the money question is settled we are opposed to any agitation for further 
changes in our tariff laws, except such as are necessary to make up the deficit in 
revenue caused by the adverse decision of the Supreme Court on the income tax. 
But for this decision by the Supreme Court there would be no deficit in the revenue 
under the law passed by a Democratic Congress, in strict pursuance of the uniform 
decisions of that court for nearly one hundred years, that court having sustained 
constitutional objections to its enactment, which have been overruled by the ablest 
judges who have ever sat on the bench. We declare it is the duty of Congress 
to use all the constitutional power which remains after that decision, or which 
may come from its reversal by the court as it may hereafter be constituted, so 
that the burdens of taxation may be equally and impartially laid to the end that 
wealth may bear its due proportion of the expenses of the Government. 

We hold that the most efficient way to protect American labor is to prevent 
the importation of foreign pauper labor to compete with it in the home market, 
and that the value of the home market to our American farmers and artisans is 
greatly reduced by a vicious monetary system which depresses the prices of their 
products below the cost of production, and thus deprives them of the means of pur¬ 
chasing the products of our home manufactures. 

The absorption of wealth by the few, the consolidation of our leading railroad 
systems and the formation of trusts and pools require a stricter control by the 
Federal Government by those arteries of commerce. We demand the enlargement 
of the powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and such restrictions and 
guarantees in the control of railroads as will protect the people from robbery and 
oppression. 

We denounce the profligate waste of the money wrung from the people by 
oppressive taxation and the lavish appropriations of recent Republican Congresses 


16 


which have kept taxes nigh while the labor that pays them is unemployed, and 
the products of the people’s toil are depressed in price till they no longer repay 
the cost of production. We demand a return to that simplicity and economy which 
benefits a Democratic Government and a reduction in the number of useless offices, 
the salaries of which drain the substance of the people. 

We denounce arbitrary interference by Federal authorities in local affairs as a 
violation of the Constitution of the United States and a crime against free institu¬ 
tions, and we especially object to government by injunction as a new and highly 
dangerous form of oppression by which Federal judges, in contempt of the laws of 
the States and the rights of citizens, become at once legislators, judges and execu¬ 
tioners ; and we approve the bill passed at the last session of the United States 
Senate and now' pending in the House relative to contempts in Federal courts and 
providing for trials by jury in certain cases of contempt. 

No discrimination should be indulged by the Government of the United States 
in favor of any of its debtors. We approve of the refusal of the Fifty-third Con¬ 
gress to pass the Pacific Railroad Funding bill, and denounce the effort of the 
present Republican Congress to enact a similar measure. 

Recognizing the just claims of deserving Union soldiers, w'e heartily endorse the 
rule of the Commissioner of Pensions that no names shall be arbitrarily dropped 
from the pension roll, and the fact of enlistment and services should be deemed 
conclusive evidence against disease or disability before enlistment. 

We favor the admission of the Territories of New Mexico and Arizona into the 
Union as States, and we favor the early admission of all Territories having the 
necessary population and resources to entitle them to Statehood, and while they 
remain Territories we hold that the officials appointed to administer the government 
of any Territory, together with the District of Columbia and Alaska, should be 
bona fide residents of the Territory or District in which their duties are to be per¬ 
formed. The Democratic party believes in home rule, and that all public lands of 
the United States should be appropriated to the establishment of free homes for 
American citizens. We recommend that the Territory of Alaska be granted a 
delegate in Congress, and that the general land and timber law's of the United 
States be extended to said Territory. 

We extend our sympathy to the people of Cuba in their heroic struggle for 
liberty and independence. 

We are opposed to life tenure in the public service. We favor appointments 
based upon merit, fixed terms of office, and such an administration of the Civil 
Service laws as afford equal opportunities to all citizens of ascertained fitness. 

The Federal Government should care for and improve the Mississippi River and 
other great waterways of the Republic, so as to secure for the interior States easy 
and cheap transportation to tide-water. When any waterway of the Republic is of 
sufficient importance to demand aid of the Government such aid should be extended 
upon a definite plan of continuous work until permanent improvement is secured. 

We declare it to be the unwritten law of this Republic, established by the cus¬ 
toms and usages of a hundred years, and sanctioned by the examples of the greatest 
and w'isest of those who founded and have maintained our Government, that no 
man should be eligible for a third term of the Presidential office. 

Confiding in the justice of our cause and the necessity of its success at the polls, 
w'e submit the foregoing declaration of principles and purposes to the considerate 
judgment of the American people. We invite the support of all citizens who 
approve them and who desire to have them made effective through legislation for the 
relief of the people and the restoration of the country’s prosperity. 

This, the much criticised platform of the Democratic party, con¬ 
tains nothing that the most hypercritical American can object to. 

We all believe in Home Rule and the dual system of govern¬ 
ment established by the founders of the Republic — the rights of 


17 


the States within certain limits and the rights of the Federal 
Government under the limitation imposed by the Constitution made 
by our forefathers. 

There can be no doubt that the Constitution does name 
silver and gold as the money metals of the United States and 
the demonetization of silver in 1873 was, certainly to say the 
least of it, contrary to the spirit as well as the words of the 
Constitution. 

There can be no doubt that it is optional with the Government 
of the United States whether it shall redeem its obligations in silver 
or gold, for the obligations so read; the transfer of the option to 
the holders of the obligation of the Government is certainly pre¬ 
judicial to the Government. 

President Andrew Jackson, of loved memory with the Demo¬ 
cratic masses, history teaches us waged relentless and successful 
warfare against granting the right to any corporation to issue 
money. 

Democrats have declared in every convention for the last 12 
years that tariff imposed upon imports, except for the purpose of 
raising revenue for the expenses of the Government, created Trusts 
and Monopolies. 

And now, the much discussed subject of the Supreme Court of 
the United States — if it were the first time that a decision of the 
Supreme Court had been criticised, one would be less astonished at 
the tremendous amount of vaporing upon the subject. When the 
Dred Scott decision was rendered, the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court of the United States was burned in effigy in many of the 
New England and Middle States, and the press of those States 
fairly bristled with editorial darts aimed at the Supreme Court. 
Again, within the memory of the writer, in 1876-7, when Samuel J. 
Tilden was defrauded of the high office of President of the United 
States, by members of the Supreme Court, the newspapers went into 
spasms, and vied with each other in the use of abusive epithets 
concerning the Supreme Court. 

With regard to the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter 
of the Income Tax, a member of that august court itself in a 
dissenting opinion designated the decision as “revolutionary.” 
Under the circumstances, and in view of the actions and de¬ 
cisions of the Supreme Court within the last half century and the 
criticism thereon by members of the court itself, the Democratic 
party was exceedingly mild in the declaration contained in its 
platform. 



18 


As to the Income Tax itself, one illustration will serve to justify 
its imposition. One William Waldorf Astor, the proprietor of an 
English Newspaper, and a resident of England, derives an income 
of several millions of dollars per annum from buildings located in 
New York City. He is obliged, of course, to pay State, County and 
City taxes, but he does not contribute one dollar to the support of 
the Federal Government. He takes the several million dollars de¬ 
rived from his American tenants, and spends them in England giv¬ 
ing fetes, entertainments, and magnificent presents to representatives 
of Royalty, while we, the Plain People of America, when we stir the 
sugar in our coffee cups each morning pay a duty on the sugar we 
use, that the Federal Government may build fortifications at Sandy 
Hook, and maintain a Navy to protect Mr. Astor’s houses in a case 
of the attempted bombardment of New York City. The Anglicized ' 
Astor pays not one dollar to the Federal Government. This one 
illustration is as good as a hundred to demonstrate the justice of an 
Income Tax. That the Income Tax is neither Anarchistic or 
Populistic we need only refer to the fact that England and almost 
every leading nation of earth derive large revenue from an Income 
Tax. 

Many of the foremost nations of Europe who are most zealously 
opposed to Anarchism control the Railroad and Telegraph lines. 
Russia, Germany and Great Britain can hardly be charged with 
friendliness to Anarchy. 

Idle arbitrary interference of the Federal Government in the 
local affairs of the different States in the Union is so clearly con¬ 
trary to the Constitution of the United States that the discussion of 
this part of the Democratic Platform is a waste of time and space. 

' Inasmuch as the Senate of the United States saw fit to pass a 
law at the last session of Congress which is now pending in the 
House of Representatives to abridge the power of Federal Judges 
to imprison for contempt of court, to discuss that part of the Dem¬ 
ocratic Platform seems needless. 

The truth of the matter is that many who condemn the Demo¬ 
cratic Platform have never taken the trouble to read it carefully, 
they have simply taken the statement of some man or newspaper 
concerning its contents. Verily it is difficult for even the most 
anxious seeker after faults in the Platform to find one. A careful 
perusal of the much misrepresented document will prove the cor¬ 
rectness of the writer’s statement. 

The New York Journal expresses the conviction that must be 
forced upon the mind of any honest and reasonable man who care- 


19 


fully reads the Platform adopted by the Democratic Party at 
Chicago : 

The manner in which the opponents of the ticket nominated at Chicago have 
begun their campaign must rouse the profoundest resentment of every American 
regardful of the interests and jealous of the honor of his country. The representa¬ 
tives of half of the American people have been denounced in delirious language as 
Anarchists, cut throats and swindlers. Their chosen candidate for the highest 
office in the Republic has been pictured as a crazy Jacobin or a designing dema¬ 
gogue. Commerce and industry have been threatened with the very panic these 
alarmists have professed to fear. 

This crusade has been one of reckless misrepresentation from the start. The 
libelers of the late convention know that the Chicago platform is not anarchical. 
In most respects it is inspired by enlightened progressiveness. The anarchical 
elements in the convention — Tillman and Altgeld — were distinctly frowned upon. 
Tillman was hissed whenever he rose to speak. The mild implied criticism of the 
majority of the Supreme Court, or, rather, of the one Justice who changed his mind, 
was thoroughly well deserved, and might have been made much stronger without im¬ 
propriety. Since when have we been endowed with infallible Judges, whose acts are 
above criticism ? If the advocacy of the just and scientific principle for the taxation 
of large incomes was anarchistic, then every statesman in England is an Anarchist, 
and, instead of searching the cellars of the Houses of Parliament for barrels of gun¬ 
powder, the authorities ought to search the pockets of every member for bombs. 
The income tax is the(backbone^f the British financial system ; it is about to be in¬ 
troduced, in a graduated form at that into France, and it already exists in its most 
extreme degree in Germany. 

The condemnation of the practice of substituting Government by injunction for 
the old, orderly processes of courts and juries, so far from being revolutionary, 
is a vindication of the ancient rights of the English speaking race against a novel 
and dangerous innovation which deserves the name of anarchy much better than 
anything done at Chicago. 

The platform reaffirms the principle indorsed by a vast majority of the people of 
the United States, of a tariff for revenue only, and protests against the disturbance 
to business that would be caused by a return to McKinleyism. There is nothing 
incendiary in that. In this point it is the Chicago platform that is conservative 
and the one adopted at St. Louis that is revolutionary. 

“We hold,” adds the Democratic profession of faith, “that the most efficient 
way of protecting American labor is to prevent the importation of foreign pauper 
labor to compete with it in the home market.” That is honest, straightforward 
protection — the only kind that does what it pretends to do. 

The Chicago platform demands simplicity and economy in government, and pro¬ 
tests against the profligate waste of money that has characterized Republican legis¬ 
lation. That is not the reckless spirit of a mob. It is rather the sober utterance 
of prudent property owners and taxpayers, of whom the Chicago Convention was 
principally composed. 

The protest against arbitrary Federal interference in local affairs is one which 
Jefferson would have commended as the very foundation stone of his political faith. 

In denouncing the attempt to swindle the Government out of more than $200,- 
000,000 by extending the Pacific Railroad debts the Convention was fighting anarchy, 
for there can be no more dangerous Anarchists than those who are powerful enough 
to override the laws and amass wealth from the property of the people. 

Moreover, the silver plank in the Chicago platform does not deserve the frantic 
vituperation leveled against it. If its authors were mistaken in their methods, their 
aim was to introduce bimetallism, and bimetallism is a scientific theory with too 
much expert authority on its side to brand its advocates as lunatics or incendiaries. 

Nor is it possible with any more sincerity to call Mr. Bryan a demagogue. He 
is the very reverse of a demagogue. He follows the truth as he sees it, though it 



20 


lead him to political destruction. Last year he could muster only ten thousand votes 
for his faction in Nebraska out of over 180,000, but he had no thought of compro¬ 
mise. He fought on, regardless of victory or defeat, thinking only of what he be¬ 
lieved to be right. If he had not been nominated nobody would have dreamed of 
calling him a demagogue. His spirit is rather that of a prophet. 

On the other side we have William McKinley, bound hand, foot and tongue to 
the most corrupt combination that ever exhibited itself openly in an American 
Presidential campaign. His election would put the resources of the Government at 
the disposal of the Hanna syndicate. It would mean a return to Chinese protection, 
and the exploitation of the people by a rapacious ring of mandarins. It would 
mean in the end a popular revolt before which affrightened conservatism might pray 
for a leader with the moderate instincts of Bryan. 

In most respects the superiority of the Democratic candidate is so palpable as to 
make comparisons needlessly cruel to his opponent. What, then, is the duty of 
American citizens who desire to secure the best possible government for the repub¬ 
lic during the next four years ? Plainly, it is to vote for that Presidential candidate 
who is manifestly best fitted to administer the Government, and to settle the finan¬ 
cial question through their representatives in Congress. Gold men may vote for 
gold candidates, silver men for silver candidates, and bimetallists for bimetallists. 
But nobody who realizes what is at stake in this campaign can vote to abandon 
government of the people, by the people, for the people, in favor of government by 
McKinley, by Hanna, for a syndicate. 


The following explanation of the whole Silver Subject by the 
Hon. Loren B. Sessions of Western New York, published in the 
Buffalo Times, July 17th, is so clear, concise and simple that I 
have taken the liberty, by permission of the Times, of giving it 
in full. This statement concerning silver gives evidence of inves¬ 
tigation, familiarity with legislative proceedings on the subject, and 
is so plain that Plain People may “ Read as they run.” 

AN INTERESTING TALK ON FINANCE FROM THE 
WIDELY KNOWN LEGISLATOR.—TO AGAIN 
RESTORE GOOD TIMES. 


ILLUSTRATES HIS VIEWS BY CITING AN EXAMPLE WHICH 
CAN READILY BE UNDERSTOOD BY THE UNINITIATED.— 
THE COUNTRY NOW IS UNDER THE DOMINITION OF WALL 
AND LOMBARD STREET GOLD SHARKS AND MUST BE 
FREED IN ORDER TO AGAIN HAVE GOOD TIMES.—HE 
REGARDS BRYAN AS THE MOSES TO LEAD THE PEOPLE 
OUT OF THEIR THRALDOM. 


NO LONGER REPUBLICAN. 

Hon. Loren B. Sessions, with his brother, the late Hon. Walter L. Sessions, 
practically controlled the Republican politics of Chautauqua County and a large 
part of Western New York for more than two decades. They held the highest 
offices and received the most distinguished honors which their people could bestow 





21 


\ 


and their devotion to Republicanism was never questioned. Of late, however, 
Loren B. Sessions has wavered in his Republicanism. On being asked the reason, 
he replied : “Well, sir, because the Republican party has ceased to be the party 
of the people.” 


PERSONALITY OF THE MAN. 

Mr. Sessions greeted the Times representative in his customary cordial manner. 
As he sat upon the veranda of his spacious country home, attired in a linen suit, 
linen gaiters and a ruffled shirt, with expansive bosom, his manners courtly as those 
of an ancient knight, everything about him indicating contentment and repose, yet 
talking with great earnestness and from deep conviction, an interested observer 
could not fail to think of the pen pictures he had read of the country’s ante-bellum 
statesman. 

The masterful manner in which he reviewed the present political situation can¬ 
not fail to interest every thoughtful man. 

WILL SUPPORT BRYAN. 

“ What do you think of the ticket nominated at Chicago ? ” 

“I am delighted with it and shall give it my earnest and hearty support, and I 
firmly believe that William J. Bryan more nearly represents the bone and sinew of 
this country than any President that has been nominated since Lincoln. fie 
has been selected by the people as their Moses to free them from the grasping 
avarice of corporations, trusts and money Shylocks of this country. He is to 
relieve them from a condition which was so prophetically described by Abraham 
Lincoln when, a short time before he was shot, he said : ‘ I see in the near future 
a crisis arising that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my 
country. As a result of the War, corporations have been enthroned and an era of 
corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will 
endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all 
wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this 
time more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst 
of the war. God grant that my fears may prove groundless.’ This is the condition 
the people w’ho sent their representatives to Chicago find themselves in to-day. Is 
it any wonder that there were earnest men there and, as our Eastern gold friends 
say, would not listen to arguments. 

FREEDOM FROM ENGLAND. 

“They were there to declare their independence of that power spoken of by 
Lincoln, and their declarations were second only to the Declaration of Independence 
of 1776. England was then our oppressor ; we were then weak ; she is now strong 
and is trying to oppress us on the money question, but, thank God, we are now 
70,000,000, strong and able and capable of formulating a financial policy which will 
make us the greatest nation on earth and the envy of the world.” 

FAVORS FREE SILVER. 

“You are in favor, then, of the financial plank in the platform?” 

“ Most assuredly I am. I am in favor of the free and unlimited coinage of both 
gold and silver at the ratio of 16 to i, and which has been so materially affected by 
legislation.” 

“You think then that legislation affects the price of the metals more than pro¬ 
duction?” 

“Most assuredly I do.” 

“What has been the legislation on gold and silver in this country, and how has 
this affected silver?” 


22 


THE LAW QUOTED. 

“The first coinage law was passed in 1792, among the first acts of Washington’s 
Administration, and that act fixed the ratio at 15 to i, and was as follows : ‘And 
be it enacted, that the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall , 
by law be current as money within the United States, shall be as 15 to i, according 
to quantity in weight, of pure gold or pure silver; that is to say, every 15 pounds 
weight of pure silver shall be of equal value in all payments with one pound weight 
of pure gold, and so in proportion to any greater or less quantities of the respective 
metals.’ It then provided for free coinage of both gold and silver in the foUow- 
ing language : 

“ ‘ And be it further enacted, that it shall be lawful for any person to bring to the 
said mint gold and silver bullion, in order to their being coined; and that the bul¬ 
lion so brought shall be there assayed and coined as speedily as may be after the 
receipt thereof, and that free of expense to the person or persons by whom the same 
have been brought. As soon as the said bullion shall have been coined the person 
or persons by whom the same shall have been delivered, shall upon demand receive 
in lieu thereof coins of the same species of bullion which shall have been so deliv¬ 
ered, weight for weight, of the pure gold or pure silver therein contained.’ 

SIZE OF THE DOLLAR. 

“It also fixed the size of the silver dollar in the following language: ‘Dollars or 
units, each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar, as the same is now current, 
and to contain 371 1-4 grains of pure or 416 grains of standard silver.’ 

“ This law fixed the limit of silver and regulated the weight of gold coin and frac¬ 
tional silver. It then fixed the legal tender of the two metals as follows : 

“ ‘ And be it further enacted, that all the gold and silver coins that shall have been 
struck off and issued from the said mint shall be a legal tender in all payments 
whatsoever, those of full weight according to the respective values therein before 
declared, and those of less than full weight at values proportional to their respective 
rights.’ 

FREE COINAGE ESTABLISHED. 

“It will be perceived that this law gave us a free bimetallic coinage system. 
The gold advocates say that under this and subsequent laws only eight millions of silver 
dollars were coined up to the time silver was demonetized in 1873. That is quite 
true, but in addition to the eight millions of silver dollars that were coined about 
153,000,000 of half dollars, quarters and ten cent pieces, and in addition to that 
Congress had made foreign silver a full legal tender like our own, and we had used 
about $150,000,000 of the same up to the time when the act was repealed in 1857 which 
made foreign silver a legal tender. This made about $311,000,000 of silver in cir¬ 
culation up to 1873, when the great crime of demonetization was perpetrated. It 
will also be seen that the Congress of the United States was not only willing and 
anxious to have all the bullion coined that came to our mint but was willing and 
anxious to use foreign coins as legal tender by inviting it to come to us. But now 
the gold monometallists hold up their hands in holy indignation and pretend to fear 
that if silver is remonetized, or put back as it was in 1873, t^^at this country would 
be flooded with foreign silver. It is all bosh. The next legislation after, the act of 
1792 was in 1834. By the law of 1792 an eagle (ten dollar gold piece) was fixed at 
2471^ grains of pure gold, and five and two and one-half dollar pieces in pro¬ 
portion. 

THE RATIO CHANGED. 

“The law of 1834 reduced the gold eagle or ten dollar piece to 232 grains, thus 
changing the gold in the gold dollar from 24 75-100 pure gold to 23 2-10 grains 
of pure gold, but leaving the silver dollar with 371 1-4 grains of pure silver 


23 


the same as under the act of 1792, and in fact the number of grains of pure 
silver in the silver dollar has never been changed since our fathers fixed it at 371 1-4 
in the act of 1792, but the act of 1834, reducing the number of grains of pure gold 
in the gold dollar changed the ratio from 15 to i to 16 to i, which remained the 
same until the act of 1873 demonetized silver. The next act was passed in 1854, 
reducing the number of grains in the silver half dollar from 206 1-4 to 192 grains 
and limiting its legal tender to five dollars. The standard silver dollar, however, 
remained a full legal tender for all amounts. The next act of Congress in relation 
to the money of the country was passed on the 12th of February, 1873, and is 
known as the act which demonetized the silver dollar. 7 'his is the way it was done : 
A bill was before Congress codifying the mint laws. Nobody dreamed for a moment 
that it was to have anything to do with the demonetizing of the silver dollar. Gen. 
Grant, who signed the bill, James G. Blaine, who was Speaker of the House and 
who signed the same as Speaker, Roscoe Conkling, a Senator from this State and a 
score of Senators who were then in Congress and who voted for the bill, have all 
stated publicly that they were not aware of the little joker in this bill, of some 63 
sections, which did the trick. 

SILVER DEMONETIZED. 

“A countryman who generally looks a paper through before he signs it, would 
naturally say that somebody was guilty of dereliction of duty, but when we 
remember that specie payments had been suspended soon after the war commenced 
and that gold and silver were not in general use among the people the carelessness 
is not to be wondered at. Again there was no call for any such legislation. Re¬ 
member that the bullion in the silver dollar at that time was worth 3 per cent, more 
than the bullion in the gold dollar. 

“It was simply done by saying, ‘That the gold coins of the United States shall 
be a one dollar, a ten, a five and a two and a half dollar piece, which, at the stand¬ 
ard weight of 25 8-10 grains shall be the unit of value.’ 

TRADE DOLLAR COINED. 

“It then provided for all the gold coins and for a silver trade dollar of 420 grains 
and made it a legal tender for only five dollars, and in 1876 even took the legal 
tender clause away from that and made gold coins a legal tender for all debts, and 
then provided, ‘ That no coins, either gold or silver, shall thereafter be issued from 
the mint other than those of the denomination, standard and weight therein set 
forth,’ and the silver dollar was not ‘therein set forth’ or mentioned, and was 
therefore dropped from our coinage. 

SILVER VALUE DESTROYED. 

“This act robbed us entirely of free coinage of silver, and thereby it became 
simply a commodity and began immediately to decline in value, gold fixing the 
price of silver, the same as of any other commodity. Then came the Bland act of 1878. 
This authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase not less than two nor 
more than four million dollars of silver per month at the market value of the bullion 
and to coin the same, making the dollars full legal tender, unless otherwise pro¬ 
vided in the contract by express stipulation. Of course, under that provision most 
of the contracts in commercial matters are made payable in gold. 

“This act, you will observe, did not provide for free coinage, which would put 
it into circulation as fast as coined, but for its purchase and storage. A farmer the 
other day asked me how gold fixed the price of silver. He said he could not under¬ 
stand it. 

AN ILLUSTRATION. 

“I told him I would illustrate it by taking an example I thought he could 
understand. Suppose A and B own all the winter wheat in a town, which 


24 


supplies the inhabitants of the place, there being but one mill where the same 
can be ground. 

“ C comes to B and wants to buy some white winter wheat for his family, the 
white and red winter wheat being worth one dollar per bushel. He asks B if his 
white winter wheat makes as much flour per bushel and is as good as A’s red winter 
wheat. Being assured that it will make the same number of pounds and as good 
flour he purchases. When this is gone he comes back for more wheat, and B is 
ready to sell. C says, ‘ Your wheat bears out the recommendation, but I can’t buy 
a bushel of you !’ ‘ Why ?’ I ask. ‘ Because,’ he says, ‘ the miller has put up a notice 
on the mill, ‘ No more white winter wheat ground at this mill, and my family can’t 
eat wheat unless it is ground. ’ 

“A stands l)y and says to B, ‘as your wheat cannot be ground into flour at the 
mill at the same time it is worth something as a commodity to feed my stock. I 
will give you 2 1-2 bushels of red winter wheat for five bushels of your white 
winter.’ B is obliged to sell or pile it up as they do silver bullion. 


WHY SILVER DEPRECIATED. 

“Uncle Sam in 1873 said no more white metal can be ground at my (mint) 
mill. 

“ What would be worth if put into money or ground out, as a commodityAo 
make watch cases and tea pots is only worth 50 cents. 

“Gold and silver metal, you see, have two values ; a money value and a com¬ 
mercial or commodity value. While under the law gold had free coinage at the 
mint the same as silver from 1792 to 1873, still retains its mintage and com¬ 
modity value while silver has been robbed and denied under the law of that which 
makes and enhances its value, to wit, free coinage, and is only allowed to retain its 
commodity value, and that to be fixed by the gold bugs of Wall Street, New York, 
and Lombard Street, in London. 

“This state of affairs is to go on, says the St. Louis platform, until we can have 
an international agreement regulating free coinage, knowing, as everybody does, 
that England, the big dog under the band wagon and a creditor nation of the 
United States, will never consent. 

“ In the meantime our land and products would continue as now, to constantly 
depreciate, or wdiat is the same thing, gold would appreciate. As you know, it now 
takes double the amount of property to procure $100 in gold that was required when 
silver was demonitized in 1873. 

“ What do you think was the moving cause of the demonetization of silver?” 

“Simply a desire to enhance the price of gold by destroying one-half of our 
redemption money—silver—and thereby enhancing the value of our bonds that were 
held in foreign countries and Wall Street.” 

“But did it? How did the demonetization of silver enhance the value of the 
bonds ? ” 

WHY BOND VALUES INCREASE. 

“Simply in this way : All of our bonds that were issued during the war and 
up to the passage of the act of the 14th of July, 1870, were payable in lawful money 
or greenbacks. The United States never from its organization to the present time 
has issued a bond payable in gold. 

“ As our bonds issued during the war were payable in lawdul money, those hold¬ 
ing them began to feel or pretend to feel, that the greenbacks might be repudiated 
and their bonds made valueless. On the 14th of July, 1870, Congress passed an 
act entitled, ‘ An act to fund the public debt.’ This authorized the Secretary of 
the Treasury to issue fifteen hundred millions in bonds to be paid in coin, gold, at 
the rate of 25 8-10 grains to the dollar, and silver at the rate of 412^ grains to the 
dollar, and to exchange these bonds for the then outstanding bonds by paying the 
difference in interest. You wdll observe that these bonds w^ere payable in coin while 


the old bonds were payable in lawful money or greenbacks. This exchange was 
made. The new l>onds rested on the double standard of both gold and silver. 
Now comes the cunning of the gold bugs. They said as these bonds under the act 
of 1870 are payable in gold or silver, if we can demonetize silver by stopping free 
coinage, there will be no silver by which the Government can pay the bonds. Con¬ 
sequently they must be paid in gold. This accounts in part for the demonetization 
of silver. 

BONDS AT A PREMIUM. 

“The bonds on the passage of the demonetization act went to a premium of 
from 25 to 32 per cent., and this Government has paid a premium of over 25 per 
cent, for millions of these bonds for what previous to the exchange sold for green¬ 
backs, dollar for dollar. The Government has paid them in gold as they have been 
presented at the treasury, never having paid a bond in silver as by the terms of the 
act under which they were issued it might have done, for the bond provided for pay¬ 
ment in either silver or gold at the option of the Secretary. Thus, silver has been 
discredited by all administrations since 1873. 

“Is it then to be wondered at that the people, seeing the injustice which has 
been practiced, seeing their property depreciating in value, is it any wonder that 
they should rise in their might and put a man in the Presidential chair that will 
designate a Secretary of the Treasury who will not discriminate and discredit silver, 
the money of the constitution ? 

“The people are going to elect a President who will stand hitched overnight on 
this silver question, and at the next election he will sweep this country as the 
unchained hurricane sweeps the leaves of an autumnal forest.” 






REPUBLICANS! READ!! 


SEE WHAT JAMES G. BLAINE SAID IN THE SENATE ON THE 
SUBJECT OF SILVER —HE DID NOT BELIEVE IN THE 
DEMONETIZATION OF SILVER. 


(From his speech in the United States Senate, in 1880.) 

“ On the much-vexed and long-mooted question as to bimetallic and monome¬ 
tallic standard my own views are sufficiently indicated in the remarks I have made. 
I believe the struggle now going on in this country and in other countries for a sin¬ 
gle gold standard would, if successful, produce widespread disaster in and through¬ 
out the commercial world. The destruction of silver as money, and establishing 
gold as the sole unit of value, must have a ruinous effect on all forms of property 
except those investments which yield a fixed return in money. Those would be 
enormously enhanced in value and would gain a disproportionate and unfair advan¬ 
tage over every other species of property. If, as the most reliable statistics affirm, 
there are nearly $7,000,000,000 of coin or bullion in the world, very equally 
divided between gold and silver, it is impossible to strike silver out of the existence 
as money without results which will prove distressing to millions and utterly disas¬ 
trous to tens of thousands. 

“I believe gold and silver coin to be the money of the constitution ; indeed, the 
money of the American people anterior to the constitution, which the great organic 
law recognized as quite independent of its own existence. No power was conferred 
on Congress to declare either metal should not be money. Congress has, therefore, 
in my judgment, no power to demonetize either. If, therefore, silver has been 
demonetized, I am in favor of remonetizing it. If its coinage has been prohibited, 
I am in favor of ordering it to be resumed; I am in favor of having it enlarged.” 


McKinley on silver. 


WHAT THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE THOUGHT AND SAID 
BEFORE MARK HANNA GAVE HIS GOLD ORDER. 


(From a speech in the House of Representatives, June 24, Congressional Record^ 

Vol. 21, page 6,447.) 

“I am for the largest use of silver in the currency of the country. I would 
not dishonor it; I would give it equal credit and honoV with gold. I would make 
no discrimination. I would utilize both metals as money and discredit neither. I 
want the double standard.” 







27 


THE FIFTY-CENT DOLLAR FALSEHOOD ! ! 


Here is the average price for bullion silver, per ounce, from 
872 to 1893 : 


1872 

1873 

1S74 

1875 

1876 

1877 

1878 

1879 

1880 

1881 

1882 

1883 

1884 

1885 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

1890 

1891 

1892 

1893 


f 1.32 

1.29 

1.27 

1.24 

I-I5 

1.20 

1.12 
1.14 

1-13 

I. II 

1.10 
1.06 
•99 
•97 
•93 
•93 
1.04 

•98 

•87 

•75 


























28 


FACTS ABOUT THE GREAT CONVENTION. 

A few facts that seem to have escaped the notice of the news¬ 
papers concerning the Great Convention of Democrats held at 
Chicago, July 7, 1896, appear of enough importance to have a place 
in this pamphlet. The total absence of Billingsgate and abuse upon 
the part of the majority, the representatives of the Plain People of 
the Democratic Party assembled at Chicago, was noticeable to the 
most casual observer. The well-bred, well-educated, refined gentle¬ 
men of the minority seemed to have a monopoly of epithets and 
insulting terms. In every discussion the delegates representing the 
Plain People of the Democracy of America at the Convention 
seemed utterly unequal to the “ Better Element ” in the use of vile, 
vulgar, and inappropriate terms to designate their brother Demo¬ 
crats, who honestly held views at variance with the wishes of the 
Plain People as expressed at Democratic Primary elections properly 
and regularly conducted. An American of sincere patriotism can 
but regret that the gentlemen of the minority had not exhausted 
their supply of opprobrious epithets at Chicago, since by the will and 
votes of the majority of Democrats a platform was adopted and 
candidates named ; however, gentlemen like the Hon. (?) Andrew D. 
White and others seemed to have replenished their supply of Bil¬ 
lingsgate. Possibly some good old Christian mothers over the wash- 
tubs on the prairies of Kansas, in the hills of Tennessee, on the mort¬ 
gaged farms of Ohio, taught their unrefined sons a different kind of 
breeding from that exhibited by the polite gentlemen graduated from 
colleges and universities. The lesson may have been something 
like that learned from the lips of the immortal Lincoln —“Charity for 
all, malice toward none.” Physically and mentally no nation on * 
earth can call together by election the equal of the men of America . 
who assembled at the Great Convention. The delegates were giants 
in stature, earnest as the Early Christians, lions in courage, and 
American for generations. Bankers, Merchants, Lawyers, Physicians 
and Farmers. God help my country! good gentlemen of the 
Monopolistic Party, if the men of the Great Convention were 
Anarchists. 

Memory will long recall the magnificent American manhood rep¬ 
resented by the grand men from Kansas; the earnest Georgi¬ 
ans ; the Tennesseeans, imbued with the love of Liberty, and the 
“ Common People ” recalling recollections of the “ People’s Presi¬ 
dent,” one Great old Andrew Jackson *, the Nebraskans, old sol¬ 
diers or sons of soldiers (for Nebraska is the Soldier State), 


29 


lacking somewhat in the ceremony of the fashionable drawing-room, 
but with hearts full of the loyalty and kindliness of the camp-fire. 
“ Want to see Mr. Bryan ? Come this way ; never mind your card 
and letter of introduction, Bryan don’t care for ceremony, he is a 
plain man of the people.” Shades of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew 
Jackson look down at last upon another Democratic nominee for 
President of the Union ! ! 

The truth is, if it be but understood by the people, since “ Old 
Hickory ” was nominated there has been no Democratic Conven¬ 
tion so absolutely Democratic in the broad sense of the term as the 
one that nominated Bryan. It is needless to illustrate by naming 
each delegation. No newspaper correspondent untrammeled by the 
orders of an imperious proprietor of the publication he represented 
at the Convention can differ with me. 

Knights of the Quill ! Did you ask some of the delegates at 
the Convention as to their ancestry and Americanism ? If you did, 
you learned that the vast majority of the delegates, like the Candi¬ 
dates of the Convention, Bryan and Sewall, came of good old 
American Stock. Even the men from the Prairie States traced back 
one, two-hundred-years Ancestors, Americans every one. Fathers 
who had fought in the Civil War, Grandfathers that followed the 
flag in Mexico, and Great-grandfathers who froze at Valley Forge 
with Washington. Heaven help America if these men be Anar¬ 
chists ! 

There were fewer intoxicated men seen and less profanity and 
ribald stories heard at the Great Convention than any national 
Convention, Democratic or Republican, held in twenty years, and 
the writer has been present at all of them. The Delegates at the 
Great Convention seemed impressed with the solemnity of the 
occasion. In their demeanor they indicated that they felt the 
sentiment “Save the Republic.” Pictures of Patrick Henry, 
George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, 
Abraham Lincoln, the British Long Parliament, the First Amer¬ 
ican Convention of Colonies, Old Anglo-Saxons fighting for Liberty, 
came before the eyes of the most material while studying the 
characters of the men of the Grand Democratic Convention. The 
spirit of the Anglo-Saxon race that forced from King John the 
Magna Charter, that took the Traitor Stuart to the headsman’s axe, 
that led the fight at Bunker Hill, seemed in the air. 

Justice Harlan of the Supreme Court had written that the 
decision in the Income Tax was “Revolutionary.” Injustice, 
wrong, outrage had been perpetrated upon the voiceless millions 


30 


of America by unjust taxation and unfair legislation. The repre¬ 
sentatives of the yeomanry of the great Anglo-Saxon race assembled 
in Chicago July 7, 1896, with all the seriousness and earnestness 
of our blood came determined to right these wrongs. 

Calling General George Washington a “Traitor,” “Rebel” and 
“ Mr.” Washington won no battle at Saratoga, nor prevented the 
surrender of Cornwallis. 

As the Heaven-sent Bryan put in words the sentiments filling 
the minds and hearts of the Plain People at the Grand Convention, 
the wTiter gazed into the earnest faces of the eager listeners and 
read, “This man is putting into words the thoughts, feelings, 
sentiments and heart burnings of us, the Plain People of our land.” 

The speech was glorious, grand, magnificent because it expressed 
in words the throbbing of the poor man’s heart, the thoughts that 
for years have filled his brain. 

Bryan’s words were only the Plain People’s thoughts and there¬ 
fore eloquent. Concentrated Capital, accumulated by unjust 
legislation, stands threatening the Grand Old Republic with Slavery, 
Revolution or Royalty, The yeomen of America, the Plain, Com¬ 
mon People by their representatives assembled in Chicago at the 
Great Convention declared that they will do now, as they did in 
1776 and 1861, “Save Liberty and the Union in America.” Bryan 
voiced the sentiments of the people, “The Country is in danger;” 
he sounded the tocsin and the might of the nation, the Plain 
People, will flock to his standard. It was clear at the time to all 
who heard William Jennings Bryan speak in the Democratic Con¬ 
vention that history was repeating itself and that Chicago was to 
be again the scene of the nomination of a President of the Plain 
People, as it had been at the memorable Convention that named 
Abraham Lincoln. 

Eastern delegates at the Convention would not have been sur¬ 
prised at the temper of the majority of the Democratic delegates 
had the Eastern men not been misled by the great newspapers 
published in the Eastern States concerning the causes that led to 
the great landslide of votes in 1892 which placed President 
Cleveland in office. The adoption of Tariff Reform ideas by the 
masses and Mr. Cleveland’s personal popularity were the reasons 
given in the East for the victory of the Democratic Party in 1892, 
and with this belief firmly fixed in their minds the Eastern delegates 
came to the Chicago Convention; they were amazed to find them¬ 
selves fencing with short tin swords against long steel rapiers. It 
ought now to be plain to the most obtuse that the Democratic 


31 


ticket was elected in 1892 not by reason of the conversion of the 
masses to the Tariff Reform creed, not by reason of Mr. Cleveland’s 
popularity, but because the masses, the Plain, Common People of 
America, by the election of Grover Cleveland in ’92, hoped to 
sufficiently rebuke the “ Classes,” the Monopoly-made Millionaires, 
the Trust-created Capitalists, to make the “Classes” halt in their 
“ Revolutionary ” march. The Plain People, the masses, were 
weary of Class legislation. “Robber Barons,” “Crests,” “Coats 
of Arms,” the assumption of the existence of “Caste” in this 
country, the buying of titled foreigners by American Capitalists 
for their daughters with the money wrung from the Plain People 
by Class legislation. Trusts and Monopolies. That, as the “Mud¬ 
sills ” of Abraham Lincoln’s time had resented the idea of Class 
legislation, so the “ Common People ” had determined to rebuke 
the assumption of foreign manners, customs, and privileges by the 
possessors of concentrated capital in the election of Grover Cleve¬ 
land at the last Presidential election. Poor men of the Republican 
faith voted for Cleveland for this reason solely, and by their votes 
secured his election. The Eastern delegates might have learned 
the true cause of Mr. Cleveland’s election in ’92 by noting the fate 
of alleged Democratic leaders who became oblivious to the wishes 
of the Plain People with regard to the “Income Tax,” “Sugar 
Trust” and other “Class legislation.” The quondam, so-called 
leaders have without exception been relegated to the shades of 
“ innocuous desuetude ” by the disappointed and disgusted Plain 
People. 

There was no potency in the cry, “this is not Jeffersonian,” 
“that is not Jacksonian,” by those attempting to manacle the will 
of the Democracy of the Plain People at the Great Democratic 
Convention. One retort of an Ohio delegate is reply enough ; 
“ Neither of those great Democrats knew anything about Railroad 
and Telegraph monopolies; there was not a man in America with an 
income of a million dollars per annum while they lived ; Sugar 
Trusts, Coal Trusts, Oil Trusts and the like, were not dreamed of 
then ;—so don’t attempt to imprison Democracy with old sayings, as 
Galileo was put in prison for revealing the fact that the earth moved 
around the Sun, in defiance of old belief.” 

When the “ Spell binders ” attempted to hypnotise their faithful 
allies by waving the Golden wand, they found themselves con¬ 
fronted with argument like this: “By the census of i860, 85 
per cent, of the people of the Union owned 100 per cent, of the 
property of the Union ; by the census of 1890, 12 per cent, of the 


people of the Union own loo per cent, of the property. In New 
York City less than 5 per cent, of the people have any property at 
all upon which taxes are collected ; there are 95 paupers to each 5 
persons worth enough to be obliged to pay any tax. These are 
facts not fancies. Charming results for Monopolies, Trusts, and a 
single Gold Standard to have accomplished in less than one genera¬ 
tion ! ” 

It was perfectly obvious that the representatives of the Demo¬ 
cratic masses assembled in the Great Convention were determined 
that there should be no excuse for mistaking the meaning of the 
Plain People of America in the election of November, 1897. Soberly, 
sternly and frankly the party of the Poor People, the Masses, the 
Plain People, served notice upon the Money-Power, “the Classes,” 
the Millionaires, the Monopolists and Money-Lenders, saying, 
“ Halt in your onward march toward Revolution, Royalty, and the 
enslavement of American freemen ; no further shall you go. You 
shall not make our land the dwelling place of Princes, Paupers, and 
Slaves.” 

When the Great Convention adjourned, and some murmurs of 
discontent and disappointment were heard from a few Eastern dele¬ 
gates, loud shouts of triumph arose from the ranks of the enemies 
of the Plain People ; bright visions of victory dawned upon the sight 
of the would-be Princes, Dukes, and Barons — but, alas ! for their 
hopes of discord in the Armies of the People, one by one the Eastern 
delegates become conscious of the danger to the very life of the 
Republic in the triumph of the “Monopolists”—“the Classes.” 
Old love of Democracy, the faith of our fathers, loyalty to. a Re¬ 
publican form of government, fill the hearts of each Eastern delegate 
one after another. On the coming November morning the Grand 
Army of the Plain People will be found in battle array united, 
ardent, and fearless confronting the Revolutionists who would d-e- 
stroy the Republic. The Eastern Democrats, with good, faithful 
Old Tammany of New York in the van, will join their brothers of 
the South and West in fighting and winning the battle of the Plain 
People — the Democratic masses of America. 

BENJ. RUSH DAVENPORT. 





I 


« 


i 


y 






I 

« 

I 


» 



i 


% 





i 


\ 


A 




i 




f 







f 



/ 



-V ■ "’■/Tv 



iiOj- ' 


’ k \ V 


' f ■ ■ 

**, I /^'^r 

^ ♦ ’•’ » * , ' 





✓ 







i ■ 


, :* 




/ .V * ; 




7 -v 


/:■' 


I--' 


.•■#i > 




S 


\' 




y 


* > - jf* . '>-f 


r. 


t(y 


•“ wJ •: ‘ . > ' • 


\- • 

Tft*' * - . . ' i!®. . * .? ’ 


A 




w 




■: K 


y-y ‘rr: 




. •• ---'• / 





ii2^ 


*' ■% 

• • fi ’ 



, > 


m fc • 


> 


£ * 





.1 • 


:\ 




\ 




4* ' —^ 

\ 

HL* ■: 

: 


, r,'-) ‘ 


# 

V'- 




1 


*s. 

1 . 



4 


< 

t ', 


.<• 

* ^ 

V 


. r • . 


V 

-■• 


• 1. 

Vv*„:Y Y -: 


'•‘i 

S *" ' 

• 

r 

4 

•‘ 1 :''(>* ■ 

> 

• * < . 

4 • 


1 * 

t V ' l £ •-• f. • 

■ .■ 

y4\:r < ', 

, • 

> 


{.» ?v/ •.'/ ‘ '• 

* :■ ■■ '.Y-^ Y 


■ / . 

•.^iCtyW. 

* r 

1, 

', ■ : ■> 

' * ' f 


:>.'■ 

'‘■'•'r-V .; 

. 'fc’'. 






1770- 





!■». »■• ' 

• i. 


'.!i* 



.1 


'* • JK- -,'^ 

' ‘ ?.'' ^’-■' •> 

^. t,* • 7 ' r 

■ J V« • 


'* ■ \ • . ■ -^r * . 

w ' ' ’ ' r« ' 

V*' • . * f .-i^ 


•. 


/. 


iV 


* / •• I 


A 






. ’■•t 


■ ■' .. ■ ,• t ■ f , 






A". 


t * 


f- 


/ > 


1 ■ 




i* 


v-^si; ’ • n 1 

‘ - 6 . .> ■ 

" . : .-/■'^ ' 




• > 





r r. -. ■' 


: ■-’-f-V-''-'-'^:.’ 

* ' * ■ '■ I ^ t s *'. / 


< ‘.- 


w 


> V 


A *. 


f 'v - ' 'V' 


>>A 




/ .r 


-. ■ -/t., V t.. 


•’‘i'A/. 
« .< ' WL^ttc 


< / 


4 J 


L 




\ . 






• \ 


y ' ‘ ^ .1 


D . 


. »■■ 


} 


« y^: 






r-V^ 


.-J 


. t 


.I.* 


• f f. 


A ’ 



_ _- * - . • V 


.1 


•if V-i ' X * •■ ' 


.\ 


i.l . y. A . 


«:• 


'Y/' 


I* 

•A- ^* 


’/ 


t • ‘j 


< • 


. i 




■t 


V 




» ^ 


•' ' ' A‘' ■'' 

k.iy'■'.' 


". - M 


K/ 



- , 

>s.S^ . < : 





'.i 






f » 




.‘■. I /. 


I ItL^ 


s^r 


*, 4 ' ■ • 


■/■• 




/ , C’fWuW “rr*#*:?- 

•■Y'-r: 


41' 


t 


>T“ 


X 


V - , , 

Y ...:■/. 


' 'V 






■|Y .‘" 



. r. .- . 




• t 




*■ t 


'■.^y 


y^\... 


'A/..r 


a 


i» 



■H •'; ’. V 'u 

■ ^ - ^ \ 


\ ■' 


■ r .7 



* • 


. * »■.’ 


■A- 






T- 


f*-. 


^ . 



A. 




A‘‘ 




* 


/ 


\ 


■My^ 


.. ■ A 'Y r 


\ ‘ 



• ^ 


V '* ■■> 


.V 


A 


• >v > 


■ -. 'Y* ■ . / 


. ■ 


hv-*.' 


V' 


«• 

A«’ 

, 

.tiyt 


'. «;..■■ 


1J 

























i ■ 

r 


\ 

■| 

r 

\ 

» 

r 

i 

I 

I 


* 


I 




I 


0 


r 














I 


■V'-' 







I 

k 





f 

I 



4 


. I 

1 ! 

I I. 



» 




'» 

t 

\ 



I 


( 


» 


)• 

t 


« 



t 

> 

i 

I 

I 













• 4 


i . 




, 












' 1 V 




■jj! 




